Register | Login
Attackpoint - performance and training tools for orienteering athletes

Discussion: invisible passages

in: DonP; DonP > 2016-02-08

Feb 8, 2016 3:39 PM # 
...hmmm, I missed that too, and looking on routegadget it looks blocked to me. I also though that the passage down to your 6 was invisibly narrow. I just followed Walter and hoped....
Feb 8, 2016 3:56 PM # 
The route between 4 and 5 certainly looks blocked to me on my map and Routegadget but judging by the split times I was one of few who didn't go that way. The passage down to No6 was virtually invisible on my map and I was first there so was very hesitant approaching it and heading down it and probably lost more time. Mrs P said there was a steady stream of runners heading in to it when she was there.
Feb 8, 2016 4:58 PM # 
I am just glad I was working and wasn't able to go!
Feb 8, 2016 11:24 PM # 
Don't complain too much, I had the first part of the course that was invisible to me in the Prologue.
Robbed us of a head to head race in the Chase!
Feb 9, 2016 10:39 AM # 
My problem with urban / sprint races is that there appears to be controversy after almost every race, with issues about map scale / map readability, crossable / uncrossable boundaries, out of bounds areas being crossed by competitors, road crossings / traffic, the requirement to interpret control descriptions to see exactly where the control's located, the placing of controls, the mapping of overpasses and underpasses, etc etc. I would avoid them but Mrs P really enjoys them and refuses to go on her own so I tag along. She does point out that, in spite of my lack of interest in them, I am reasonably successful in them, although I do come unstuck running against the English urban race specialists.
I feel sorry for the event officials who volunteer to take on the planning and controlling roles as the nature of this branch of the sport, especially with some of the areas chosen for the competitions, makes a lot of this controversy inevitable.
Feb 9, 2016 10:50 AM # 
You get a lot of the same controversy in forest races too, it's the nature of the sport
Feb 9, 2016 11:56 AM # 
Nothing like as much. Largely because:
(a) Forest orienteering is inherently vague in comparison to urban (shades of runnability, contour interpretation, etc.)
(b) OOB is usually much less of a factor
(c) Time differences are lower in urban - especially sprint - so mapping / planning issues matter more
(d) Urban racing protocols still aren't fully understood by lots of people
Feb 9, 2016 1:19 PM # 
All of the above play a part, but more significant are:
(e) poor cartography: a great deal of redrawing is required to make the map legible in complicated areas, you can’t just colour in a .dxf file. (ISSOM gives minimum sizes for objects and minimum separations between lines of the same colour which are often ignored. They need to be regarded as absolute minimums, this year’s WOC maps were exaggerated well beyond them)
(f) poor printing: the same issues crop up repeatedly with laser-printed urban maps – the buildings (and sometimes the olive- green OOB) are too dark, and the overprint is the wrong shade and doesn’t stand out. On the S Queensferry map the printing seems to have spread the black – so that the narrow path to DonP’s #6 (our #8) has disappeared on the map (although it’s visible, albeit too narrow, on RG)
I really like sprint orienteering (because I’m too lazy to race far and crap at navigating :-) ) but am often frustrated by the map lottery.

This discussion thread is closed.